The presidential candidates of the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) have both announced their energy policies. It is regrettable that their policies do not address international concerns.
Due to climate change and an energy crisis, the international community is increasingly emphasizing the development of distributed generation, renewable energy and energy flexibility. The KMT and TPP presidential candidates still propose relying on nuclear power. They also suggest reactivating old nuclear power plants. Their outdated thinking is reminiscent of the government’s policy 40 years ago, which focused on developing large-scale generation of electricity at centralized facilities.
In the 1980s, the government opened several nuclear power plants to meet the fast-growing demand for electricity. At the time, the government determined the amount of supply based on the amount of demand, and focused on centralized generation. This policy led to energy rationing in certain regions.
The Ministry of Economic Affairs allowed the private sector to establish independent power producers to generate electricity for sale between 1995 and 1999. These independent power producers have provided 19 percent of the nation’s annual electricity consumption, showing that the best solution for power system instability lies in investment in the private sector.
After four decades, due to the Renewable Energy 100 project and the goal of reaching net zero emissions, Taiwan’s demand for electricity has been coupled with the development of green energy. It is not that Taiwan has failed to generate enough power. The major problem is that it does not have enough green energy.
Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co thought about building its own renewable energy power system, but chairman Mark Liu (劉德音) concluded that it was “way too complicated.” Liu’s comment demonstrated how many hurdles a private company needs to overcome to develop green energy for its own use.
The next government must outline policies and agendas that would encourage corporations to invest in improving the nation’s green energy systems. Companies that need to rely on green energy can be both the manufacturer and the consumer, and hence the burden of green power generation can be distributed more equally.
The government has failed to achieve its goals in terms of green energy development. One reason is that the ruling party’s policy has been too dependent on state-run Taiwan Power Co, which has monopolized the energy market for some time.
The US government has introduced energy tax credits, an incentive that reduces the cost for people and businesses to use alternative energy sources. The purpose is to encourage corporations to develop green energy and be self-reliant. As long as a business has established solar power facilities or invested in photovoltaic projects, it can claim tax deductions in proportion to either the investment or the amount of electricity generated.
Such a measure is worth considering. The government must offer more economic incentives for Taiwanese businesses.
Greenpeace Taiwan hopes that the presidential candidates will offer new energy policies that are more original and pioneering. Through policy subsidies, incentives and collaboration, the government must help firms transform from consumers of green energy to producers, so that they can achieve the goal of “self-generation and self-consumption.”
The government, businesses and wider society would then be able to work together and help Taiwan solve the problem of renewable energy development.
Chen Yung-jen is climate and energy project manager at Greenpeace East Asia..
Translated by Emma Liu
Concerns that the US might abandon Taiwan are often overstated. While US President Donald Trump’s handling of Ukraine raised unease in Taiwan, it is crucial to recognize that Taiwan is not Ukraine. Under Trump, the US views Ukraine largely as a European problem, whereas the Indo-Pacific region remains its primary geopolitical focus. Taipei holds immense strategic value for Washington and is unlikely to be treated as a bargaining chip in US-China relations. Trump’s vision of “making America great again” would be directly undermined by any move to abandon Taiwan. Despite the rhetoric of “America First,” the Trump administration understands the necessity of
In an article published on this page on Tuesday, Kaohsiung-based journalist Julien Oeuillet wrote that “legions of people worldwide would care if a disaster occurred in South Korea or Japan, but the same people would not bat an eyelid if Taiwan disappeared.” That is quite a statement. We are constantly reading about the importance of Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC), hailed in Taiwan as the nation’s “silicon shield” protecting it from hostile foreign forces such as the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), and so crucial to the global supply chain for semiconductors that its loss would cost the global economy US$1
US President Donald Trump’s challenge to domestic American economic-political priorities, and abroad to the global balance of power, are not a threat to the security of Taiwan. Trump’s success can go far to contain the real threat — the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) surge to hegemony — while offering expanded defensive opportunities for Taiwan. In a stunning affirmation of the CCP policy of “forceful reunification,” an obscene euphemism for the invasion of Taiwan and the destruction of its democracy, on March 13, 2024, the People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) used Chinese social media platforms to show the first-time linkage of three new
Sasha B. Chhabra’s column (“Michelle Yeoh should no longer be welcome,” March 26, page 8) lamented an Instagram post by renowned actress Michelle Yeoh (楊紫瓊) about her recent visit to “Taipei, China.” It is Chhabra’s opinion that, in response to parroting Beijing’s propaganda about the status of Taiwan, Yeoh should be banned from entering this nation and her films cut off from funding by government-backed agencies, as well as disqualified from competing in the Golden Horse Awards. She and other celebrities, he wrote, must be made to understand “that there are consequences for their actions if they become political pawns of
RSS